- •Tablet burden is often substantial, and can cause significant inconvenience.
- •There are significant potential risks associated with polypharmacy.
- •Benefits of treating chronic conditions in these patients are questionable.
- •A more critical approach is needed regarding concomitant medications.
The implications for patients with cancer, of the ‘tablet burden’ resulting from increasing use of oral anticancer drugs and medication for co-morbidities have not previously been well explored.
We sought to (i) quantify tablet burden in women with metastatic breast cancer (MBC), (ii) establish which groups of drug contribute most to this burden and (iii) gain insight into patients' attitudes towards oral anti-cancer treatment.
One hundred patients with MBC anonymously completed a questionnaire describing their medication histories and attitudes towards their tablets.
The patients (mean age 60, range 31–95) were all female and taking a median of six tablets (range 0–31) daily; 37 patients were taking >10 tablets. Oral anticancer treatment constituted the category of treatment taken by the highest proportion of patients, followed by symptomatic cancer treatments, proton pump inhibitors and cardiovascular medication. Numerically, however, symptomatic drugs accounted for 44% of all tablets and specific anti-cancer treatment for 15%; medication not directly related to the cancer accounted for the remaining 40% of tablets. A quarter of patients reported inconvenience in taking their tablets, the main reason being tablet size and one third reported forgetting their tablets at least once a week. Nearly two thirds of patients expressing a preference favoured oral anticancer treatment, the commonest reason being greater convenience.
Tablet burden is considerable for many patients with MBC and can be problematic. A significant proportion of tablets represent treatment for co-morbidities, the significance of which may be questionable in women with MBC.
To read this article in full you will need to make a payment
Purchase one-time access:Academic & Personal: 24 hour online accessCorporate R&D Professionals: 24 hour online access
One-time access price info
- For academic or personal research use, select 'Academic and Personal'
- For corporate R&D use, select 'Corporate R&D Professionals'
Subscribe:Subscribe to European Journal of Cancer
Already a print subscriber? Claim online access
Already an online subscriber? Sign in
Register: Create an account
Institutional Access: Sign in to ScienceDirect
- Oral chemotherapy: rationale and future directions.J Clin Oncol. 1998; 16: 2557-2567
- Patient preferences for oral versus intravenous palliative chemotherapy.J Clin Oncol. 1997 Jan; 15: 110-115
- Effective oral chemotherapy for breast cancer: pillars of strength.Ann Oncol. 2008; 19: 212-222
- Drug-drug interactions in oncology: why are they important and can they be minimized?.Crit Rev Oncol Hematol. 2005 Aug; 55: 117-142
- Polypharmacy, aging and cancer.Oncology (Williston Park). 2008 Aug; 22 (discussion 1055, 1058, 1060): 1052-1055
- The impact of new chemotherapeutic and hormone agents on survival in a population-based cohort of women with metastatic breast cancer.Cancer. 2007; 110: 973
- Overview of the changing paradigm in cancer treatment: oral chemotherapy.Am J Health Syst Pharm. 2007 May 1; 64: S4-7
- Patient preference and pharmacokinetics of oral modulated UFT versus IV fluorouracil and leucovorin; a randomised crossover trial in advanced colorectal cancer.Eur J Cancer. 2002; 38: 349-358
- A randomised cross-over trial comparing patient preference for oral capecitabine and 5-fluorouracil/leucovorin regimes in patients with advanced colorectal cancer.Ann Oncol. 2006; 17: 239-245
- Adherence beliefs among breast cancer patients taking tamoxifen.Patient Educ Couns. 2005; 59: 97-102
- Prevalence of the coprescription of clinically important interacting drug combinations involving oral anticancer agents in Singapore: a retrospective database study.Clin Ther. 2012; 34: 1696-1704
- Potential drug interaction and duplicate prescriptions among cancer patients.J Natl Cancer Inst. 2007; 99: 592-600
- Long-term all cause mortality in cancer patients with preexisiting diabetes mellitus.JAMA. 2008 December 17; 300: 2754-2764https://doi.org/10.1001/jama.2008.824
- Treating diabetic patients with chemotherapy : single centre experience of toxicity and outcomes.ESMO Congr. 2012; (abstract 1549PD)
- Diabetes mellitus and breast cancer outcomes: a systematic review and meta-analysis.J Clin Oncol. 2011; 29: 40-46
- Hypothyroidism after a cancer diagnosis: etiology, diagnosis, complications, and management.The Oncologist. 2014; 19: 34-43
- NICE lipid modification: cardiovascular risk assessment and the modification of blood lipids for the primary and secondary prevention of CVD. NICE clinical guideline 181. July 2014
- The effects of lowering LDL cholesterol with statin therapy in people at low risk of vascular disease: meta-analysis of individual data from 27 randomised trials.Lancet. 2012 Aug 11; 380 ([Epub 2012 May 17]): 581-590
Rosensan RS. Clinical trials of cholesterol lowering for primary prevention of coronary heart disease, uptodate topic 4558 version 13.0.
- Statin prescribing patterns in a cohort of cancer patients with poor prognosis.J Palliat Med. 2013 Apr; 16: 412-418
- Evaluation of prescribing medications for terminal cancer patients near death: essential or futile.Cancer Res Treat. 2013 Sep; 45: 220-225
- Use of gastric acid-suppressive agents and the risk of community-acquired Clostridium difficile-associated disease.JAMA. 2005 Dec 21; 294: 2989-2995
- Proton-pump inhibitor pneumonia: not a breath of fresh air at all?.World J Gastrointest Pharmacol Ther. Jun 6, 2011; 2: 17-26
Published online: December 28, 2015
Accepted: November 12, 2015
Received in revised form: October 15, 2015
Received: August 13, 2015
© 2015 Elsevier Ltd. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.